[OneCity]

I've skimmed through some 20 odd pages.

Observation - nobody has given any fact-based reason as to why the Sheppard Subway Extension should be built.

Here is some fact-based reasoning.


SUBWAY
-adequate for ridership
-does not create an extra transfer prior to SCC or Agincourt which are two main central areas
-would complete a seamless belt loop connecting Toronto growth nodes
-there is no intention to convert North Yorks subway stub to LRT
-LRT already rejected politically, support is also highly questionable
-re-opening as current form will likely cause delays. Delays = $$$


LRT
-adequate for ridership
-extra transfer created prior to two main areas Central Scarborough
-cheaper in cost
-old proposal went to Morningside

.

 

[sixrings]

Fact - Scarborough has been short changed in regards to subways.
Fact -Scarborough Will for Ford if Tory doesn't give in

 

[junctionist]

If these areas want the transit expansion to happen as a subway, it should be built at a cost that reflects ridership projections. If you want a subway and the ridership projections are low, the subway has to be a trenched, elevated or hydro-corridor line. Not building anything isn't an option anymore given the city's congestion problems. An unobtrusive LRT right of way vs. an elevated subway structure would be a more difficult choice for local residents.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Here is some fact-based reasoning.

SUBWAY
-adequate for ridership

No, this is unequivocally false.

From the Sheppard East LRT EA:

"The expected future travel demand on Sheppard Avenue is well below what would be required to justify the high costs of subway or elevated transit-ways. Based on the population and employment forecasts in the Sheppard area, the City and the TTC have projected that the transit demand in the Sheppard corridor will increase to 3,000 persons per hour in the peak direction at the busiest point on the line. This number would increase to 5,000 if a subway were constructed; the majority of the extra 2,000 people on a subway, relative to LRT, would re-route from other transit services to take advantage of the subway’s greater speed. Subway / Rapid Transit (SRT) technology is not justified if the peak hour demands are not approaching the range of 10, 000 people per hour during peak hour in the busiest direction (as shown in Figure 7-1)."

Subway capacity is 30,000 pphd. Sheppard East pulls in 5,000. That is 17% of the subway capacity.

-does not create an extra transfer prior to SCC or Agincourt which are two main central areas

You are telling me that it is good use of money to remove a transfer for 2,000pphd gain?

-would complete a seamless belt loop connecting Toronto growth nodes

Neither NYCC or STC are growing very quickly, or at all. The growth they do experience is mostly residential from the odd condo.

There is no demonstrable need for a connection between these two nodes. The ridership is not there.

Which area of the city facing pressing growth should not receive transit so that we build a subway to service extra 2,000pphd on Sheppard?

-no intention to convert subway stub to LRT
-already rejected politically, support is highly questionable
-re-opening as current form will likely cause delays. Delays = $$$

Then we need better politicians and better ideas.

In the meantime, Sheppard is ideal for BRT. BRT can work up to 8,000 pphd, BRT won't cause delays or large capital costs, and Sheppard can grow it's ridership over the next 30 years.

 

[kEiThZ]

In the meantime, Sheppard is ideal for BRT. BRT can work up to 8,000 pphd, BRT won't cause delays or large capital costs, and Sheppard can grow it's ridership over the next 30 years.

They should be building some form of BRT (even if it's just express buses and diamond lanes) on every major avenue north of Eglinton in my opinion. It would improve the transit experience a ton.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

YRT has the annual ridership for the Dufferin bus, and look at the amounts of BRT they have.

We absolutely should have a network of BRT criss crossing the city.

 

[OneCity]

No, this is unequivocally false.

From the Sheppard East LRT EA:

"The expected future travel demand on Sheppard Avenue is well below what would be required to justify the high costs of subway or elevated transit-ways. Based on the population and employment forecasts in the Sheppard area, the City and the TTC have projected that the transit demand in the Sheppard corridor will increase to 3,000 persons per hour in the peak direction at the busiest point on the line. This number would increase to 5,000 if a subway were constructed; the majority of the extra 2,000 people on a subway, relative to LRT, would re-route from other transit services to take advantage of the subway’s greater speed. Subway / Rapid Transit (SRT) technology is not justified if the peak hour demands are not approaching the range of 10, 000 people per hour during peak hour in the busiest direction (as shown in Figure 7-1)."

Subway capacity is 30,000 pphd. Sheppard East pulls in 5,000. That is 17% of the subway capacity.



You are telling me that it is good use of money to remove a transfer for 2,000pphd gain?



Neither NYCC or STC are growing very quickly, or at all. The growth they do experience is mostly residential from the odd condo.

There is no demonstrable need for a connection between these two nodes. The ridership is not there.

Which area of the city facing pressing growth should not receive transit so that we build a subway to service extra 2,000pphd on Sheppard?



Then we need better politicians and better ideas.

In the meantime, Sheppard is ideal for BRT. BRT can work up to 8,000 pphd, BRT won't cause delays or large capital costs, and Sheppard can grow it's ridership over the next 30 years.

Ridership is adequate. LRT, BRT and subway is capable should they choose.

The Sheppard stubway is the real issue here. We can beat a dead horse with facts for an against how to connect into it. If there is no interest to do anything but leave it "as is" then yes I fully support the subway when that times comes again for debate and I expect likely in the heavy majority here will do the same. The location for the proposed transfer is not good, the stubway is absurd if this is who we are connecting Scarborough into it. This line should just be removed for surface LRT or BRT if it cant be modified to fit another technology

 

[Rainforest]

My view: 1) This corridor is not top priority for either subway or LRT construction. I wouldn't mind Sheppard LRT being built as is, that would be of some use. But since it has become "politically poisoned", it is just fine to transfer the funding to another corridor, and enhance Sheppard East service by adding a mixed-traffic express bus that goes all the way to Rouge Hill.

2) Building BRT east of Don Mills is not a bad idea, either. It is adequate for the projected ridership, and at the same time its moderate cost does not preclude rail expansion at some point in future.

3) If we want to expand the rail service east of Don Mills now or in the near future, then we ought to look at options that eliminate the transfer, but do not cost as much per km as a full-fledged TTC subway.

 

[TransitBart]

Why do EAs contain drivel like this?

"The expected future travel demand on Sheppard Avenue is well below what would be required to justify the high costs of subway or elevated transit-ways. Based on the population and employment forecasts in the Sheppard area..."

When I worked at Yonge and Sheppard, and I was travelling on Line 2 to get to Line 1 from Royal York, travelling on Line 2 had nothing to do with living anywhere close to it or demand for anything. It was the ONLY way to get ANYWHERE. Like another east-west corridor across the top of the city won't be treated the same way. It might rescue all those who are heading south in order to move east-west and then moving back north again. Oh yeah. I started at Lawrence. Went all the way to Bloor. Then across to Yonge. Then up to Sheppard. Not certain here if people who write EAs talk to people who take transit or commute or have ever tried to get across the city at the north end other than by car on the 401.

 

[lead82]

The big pain point is the transfer. However, I don't think the ridership is even remotely there for a subway. It's not really even there for an LRT to be honest. BRT and the express bus now do a decent enough job to connect Don Mills station and SCC. The speed can be improved with BRT dedicated lanes. Given the starvation for transit that this city had it doesn't make she's to waste money on extremely expensive subway lines in the suburbs but that is exactly what Toronto does at detriment to itself.

There has been no useful subway lines built since the 1980s RT, which was a bad technology for this city. The Spadina line is woefully under used north of Eglinton and the new extension to Vaughan will be lucky to get 2000 pphpd. Sure York U will get decent ridership and the Pioneer village and Finch W stations due to bus feeders. Outside of the bus feeders none of those stations will get much walk ins as they are surrounded by empty fields, Hydro corridors or highways. Vaughan may eventually get decent ridership once fully built up in 30 years but for now the subway will likely barely get 10% capacity usage.

The issue is the land use around the stations and in the neighbourhood surrounding. There are few destinations there. The only saving grace for Sheppard is the Consumers road office area. However from what I know working in that area, many people who work there drive from up north - Markham and Richmond Hill. The Sheppard line connection will be utterly useless to them unless it connects better to Richmond Hill GO and Markham GO.

A case could be made to extend the subway east to Agincourt GO as that will be a RER station to facilitate better connectivity for those coming from Markham. Another simple thing the city should do is to move the Oriole GO station north about 100-150M so that it has a direct connection with Leslie station. When I used that station I was dumbfounded that the connection requires a 10min walk. There is no need for the station to be under the 401. The car drivers who park can walk up a bit. The way it is now makes it a 10 min walk to get between the stations and that is too long. These two simple things could make the Sheppard line more connected and therefore more useful from those coming from 905 area and work along Sheppard.

 

[lead82]

Why do EAs contain drivel like this?

"The expected future travel demand on Sheppard Avenue is well below what would be required to justify the high costs of subway or elevated transit-ways. Based on the population and employment forecasts in the Sheppard area..."

When I worked at Yonge and Sheppard, and I was travelling on Line 2 to get to Line 1 from Royal York, travelling on Line 2 had nothing to do with living anywhere close to it or demand for anything. It was the ONLY way to get ANYWHERE. Like another east-west corridor across the top of the city won't be treated the same way. It might rescue all those who are heading south in order to move east-west and then moving back north again. Oh yeah. I started at Lawrence. Went all the way to Bloor. Then across to Yonge. Then up to Sheppard. Not certain here if people who write EAs talk to people who take transit or commute or have ever tried to get across the city at the north end other than by car on the 401.

That's quite the detour. Was the Lawrence bus to Lawrence station that slow that going south to Line 2 was faster? If so then I think the solution is likely more express buses. Suburban transit in Toronto is slow because the TTC routes have way too many stops and it's a nightmare to travel long distances.

I think when EAs mention tie ridership they already take into account the attractiveness of a subway bringing more riders. That's why they project 3000 pphpd job Sheppard as core demand and 2000 more for a total of 5000 pphpd if subway technology was used because of the speed for cross town travel. The point argued before is that a subway is overkill for this especially since this demand is peak demand mostly and outside of that it drops precipitously where a subway is not needed. It's really about how we prioritize spending our tax money to get the biggest value. Transit City while far from perfect was the closest attempt at doing this. I really wish we had a proper LRT line built in Toronto so people can see it, ride it and want more built.

 

[TransitBart]

That's quite the detour. Was the Lawrence bus to Lawrence station that slow that going south to Line 2 was faster? If so then I think the solution is likely more express buses. Suburban transit in Toronto is slow because the TTC routes have way too many stops and it's a nightmare to travel long distances.

That's why I didn't take the bus to Lawrence and go north. Milk route. At least the subway had air conditioning and you felt like you were moving.

 

[OneCity]

I really wish we had a proper LRT line built in Toronto so people can see it, ride it and want more built.

It's not the technology. Its how we connect to what already exists. LRT is fine, the way its connected creates an extra transfer that doesn't exist. Most commuters would prefer to take a Bus to subway, instead of Bus to LRT to subway. This will always be the main support if the stubway remains. Just improve bus routes until the debate starts again. Agincourt and SCC are central and important areas that should have transfer in front. After OK. IDC if its subway, LRT or BRT.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Ridership is adequate. LRT, BRT and subway is capable should they choose.

The Sheppard stubway is the real issue here. We can beat a dead horse with facts for an against how to connect into it. If there is no interest to do anything but leave it "as is" then yes I fully support the subway when that times comes again for debate and I expect likely in the heavy majority here will do the same. The location for the proposed transfer is not good, the stubway is absurd if this is who we are connecting Scarborough into it. This line should just be removed for surface LRT or BRT if it cant be modified to fit another technology

At the highest time of usage, the subway would only be 17% full. If you are going to fully support the subway just because "subway" then don't feel bad when others call your position out for blatant disregard of available facts in favour of selfish neighbourhood tribalism.

Yes, you can very much run a subway with 5,000 peak-hour ridership - the point is we do not want to. Given that the ridership is clearly within range of LRT and BRT, the discussion then develops to "what is the biggest bang for the buck?" to which, subway clearly is not the answer. As a Torontonian and a taxpayer to the whole city of Toronto, it makes zero sense to support subway option here if not for the existence of the stubway. Doing nothing would actually preferable to subway, not because we hate Scarborough, but because the cost of the subway is egregious and the benefits negligible. Now, I actually do not want to do nothing, because there are some things we can do to improve the corridor such as building a BRT, which might actually be preferrable to a subway in many ways if we gave it some thought in design.

 

[BMO]

Why do EAs contain drivel like this?

"The expected future travel demand on Sheppard Avenue is well below what would be required to justify the high costs of subway or elevated transit-ways. Based on the population and employment forecasts in the Sheppard area..."

When I worked at Yonge and Sheppard, and I was travelling on Line 2 to get to Line 1 from Royal York, travelling on Line 2 had nothing to do with living anywhere close to it or demand for anything. It was the ONLY way to get ANYWHERE. Like another east-west corridor across the top of the city won't be treated the same way. It might rescue all those who are heading south in order to move east-west and then moving back north again. Oh yeah. I started at Lawrence. Went all the way to Bloor. Then across to Yonge. Then up to Sheppard. Not certain here if people who write EAs talk to people who take transit or commute or have ever tried to get across the city at the north end other than by car on the 401.

Honestly, EAs are built, often, on outdated transportation demand models that could be using outdated assumptions or outdated population and employment numbers. Not saying they're useless, just that depending on the political appetite certain assumptions can be modified to make certain forecasts predict what you want them to predict. An example is assuming growth will be constrained based on existing zoning, when It may be possible that we see areas close to subways see a tremendous amount of zoning amendments that end up exceeded expect population and employment forecasts. On the flip side it's easy to look backwards and say a line like Shepard didn't even meet it's targeted growth projections when the line did little but provide a shuttle service to Yonge with very few trip generators connected or attempts at intermodal connections (ahem Oriole GO). Most people would just forgo Shepard and move somewhere along Yonge if they want to take transit. Most people in high density housing in Sheppard likely drive the 401 instead.